UFI

Archive for the ‘Abstinence’ Category

Speak Up for Family and Life

In Abortion, Abstinence, Child Development, Choice, Diane Robertson, Divorce, Families, father, Free Speech, Freedom, Marriage, Media, Parenting, Planned Parenthood, Prostitution, Sanctity of Life, Sexual Freedom, Technology, The Family, Values on August 26, 2015 at 8:47 am

Ashley Madisonby Diane Robertson

There’s this infamous company in Canada, Ashley Madison, which hosts a purportedly secret online dating service for people who are married or in a committed relationship. The company’s slogan is “Life is short. Have an affair.” Customers pay Ashley Madison to help them have extra marital affairs and one night stands.

On July 15th of this year hackers stole the company’s “secret” customer data—including email addresses, names, home addresses, sexual fantasies and credit card information. At the time, Hackers said they would release the information to the public if Ashley Madison did not permanently shut down. On July 22nd, the company released just the first names of the customers. When the company did not comply with the demands of the hackers, they released all of the information on Aug 18th.

The fall out has been huge with ordinary people to celebrities such as Josh Duggar being outed for cheating on their spouses.

The Toronto police department even reported that two people committed suicide because they were outed by the hackers. The Toronto police department blamed the hackers stating this would “not be tolerated”.

Normally, I agree that hacking is wrong. It’s typically used to gain access to personal information for financial gains. I feel like this situation is different. I agree with the hackers that the company is abominable. They make money while facilitating the breakup of marriages and families. I think justice has been served.

Most people are standing by the fact that hacking is illegal, and that what these hackers did was wrong because they have ruined millions of lives. I agree that hacking is illegal and should be. But I do not believe the hackers are responsible for ruining the lives of the adulterers. Rather, those committing adultery are responsible for ruining their own lives. They made conscious choices to do something they were very aware would harm their spouse, their children, and ultimately themselves.

I am going to speak as a Christian in an appeal to other Christians. I believe that as Christians it is imperative for us to recognize what is wrong and damaging to families and to society and call it out. We need to make judgments so that we can understand what is good and what is bad. Sadly, as a society we have been bullied into a place where we won’t say something is right or wrong because it might hurt someone’s feelings. We cower at the being called names, and our unwillingness to face the criticism of those calling us judgmental or bigoted or hateful has led to a whole host of societal ills.

Ashley Madison would not exist if there weren’t enough corrupt people willing to pay for it. Companies can only exist if there is enough of a market to be profitable. Along the same lines, Planned Parenthood and abortion clinics wouldn’t exist if there weren’t so many mothers and fathers willing to sacrifice the very life of their children for the sake of lust and convenience.

I look around me and see that as a society we have given our compassion to the people selfishly destroying life and family instead of those who have had their lives and families destroyed. The people who need our compassion are the husbands and wives whose marriages have been shattered by infidelity, the sons and daughters who are left without a mother or a father because of the resulting divorce, and the babies that never breathed because their parents did not want them.

Just 60 years ago, compassion was given to the real victims and as a result more people considered the consequences before breaking apart their families or taking the lives of their unborn children. The pressure to live a chaste life meant that life and family were cherished. Now, individual choice is cherished, and life and family are discarded.

To Christians, I say, make a choice. Is what we say and how we judge saving lives and strengthening families, or is it promoting (quietly or openly) the destruction of life and the breakdown of families? Those who hacked into the Ashley Madison website, may have committed a crime, but they also made an important statement about marriage and family. They stood up for love and fidelity. We can to, and we don’t even need to break the law to do so. We just need to speak.

Focus on the Next Generation

In Abstinence, Child Development, Choice, Drug Use, Families, father, Free Speech, Freedom, Grandparents, Marriage, motherhood, Parental Rights, Parenting, Sex Education, Sexual Freedom, The Family, Values on August 24, 2015 at 1:27 pm

couple in love 3by Erin Weist

I have four boys. Four wonderful, mischievous, wrestling, tumbling, occasionally smelly little boys. Someday they will be young men. Then they will go on to become men. I burst with pride at this thought, hoping with all my heart they become valiant, courageous, faithful, hard-working, responsible men. I think of this when I hear neighborhood reports of vulgar vandalism by boys as young as 12. I think of this when I read studies about boys near that same age who are addicted to hard-core porn. I worry for my boys and I worry for my daughter that these are the men she has to choose from as a potential spouse. I want my boys to be good men that someone else can entrust their daughter to and I want to entrust my daughter to a good man who will love her.

I spoke with my 97 year old grandmother this week. I told her I wanted to give my boys advice about how to treat a lady. I told her I thought a lot of those worthy traditions had been lost and that “old-fashioned” was considered a bad word. I loved hearing her stories when she recounted how respectful my grandfather had always been. He opened doors for her. He helped her with her chair. His language in her presence was above reproach. When they were courting they hardly ever spent time alone. My grandmother’s parents thought my grandfather was of a lower class and wouldn’t allow them to see each other, so instead they met at my great-aunt’s house, always chaperoned and usually helping with household chores. On the few occasions they went out it was generally with another couple.

With a twinkle in her eye my grandmother recounted to me (for the umpteenth time) how she was coming down the stairs at their high school and my grandfather saw her for the first time. He leaned over to his buddy and said, “There’s the girl I’m going to marry.” There was no temptation to engage in sexual activity while they were dating because the goal they had in mind was marriage. They wanted to spend time getting to know each other and focusing on the future.

Encouraging marriage and holding it up as an ideal in our society is a way to decrease the social ills that come from sexual promiscuity. If you want to start a fight online just dare to mention abstinence as a valid form of birth control. It wasn’t an issue for my grandmother because there was no social pressure; there was no public demand for birth control for young girls; there was, instead, a focus of marriage and family.

I know we can’t romanticize earlier ages just because we want to think about the rosy things. My great-grandmother was forced to marry a man in his 30s when she was only 13 years old. Her life was frankly horrifying. But that mostly came from an unloving father who didn’t want to care for her. We have the same problem today in one form or another. Again, things are better when we focus on marriage and family.

Young men today: would you make different choices as a teenager if you were focused on one day becoming a husband & father? Young women: would you make different choices or be more selective of who you date, and HOW you date, if you were using it as a catalyst to someday becoming a wife & mother?

I understand that unwanted pregnancy is an epidemic, particularly among lower socio-economic classes. But rather than focus on picking up the broken pieces, putting band-aids on gushing wounds, our legislation, our public policy, our mission statement as communities and civic leaders should be to focus on marriage and families. Everybody wins when young men grow up to be responsible husbands & fathers. Everyone wins when young women are revered and protected as the next generation of wives & mothers. I’m working for that in my home and my community. Will you join me?

There’s Nothing Wrong With That Child

In Abortion, Abstinence, Child Development, Choice, date rape, Down Syndrome, Education, Families, Feminism, Freedom, Gender, Health Care, Homosexuality, motherhood, Planned Parenthood, Research, Sanctity of Life, Sex Selection Abortion, Sexual Freedom, Sexual Orientation, Single Mothers, Technology, Values on August 4, 2015 at 12:20 pm

babies crawlingby Holly Gardner

Readers, I’ve heard the arguments over and over again. “Woman’s right to choose,” “My body, my choice.” Well sister, (in most cases) you’ve already made your choice: when you made your baby. And it’s not just your body, it’s that absolutely innocent one you’re carrying as well who apparently deserves no consideration in the matter, and no right to choices. But I’m sure you’ve all heard this before.

I have a new perspective I’d like to share with you. Let me tell you a story.

My father works for a big company, with different co-workers every week, all from vastly different backgrounds and from all over the world. My dad also is a talkative, curious, intelligent man, and often engages in “thinker” discussions with his co-workers.

One particular day, his fellow employee was a younger woman of mixed heritage (half black, half white.) Let’s call her “Jane.” My dad said Jane was one of the best he’s ever worked with. He also said she was super liberal. While getting ready for the day, the topic of abortion came up, and my dad decided to tell Jane about a recent experience he had with a male gay co-worker.

This particular man (Let’s call him “John”) believes in a “woman’s right to choose.” He also believes abortions should be readily available. No questions asked, and no mandated education offered before such abortion. “It’s her choice, and I respect that.” Basically, she shouldn’t have to explain herself, and she shouldn’t have to be shown her options. If she wants it, there it is.

My dad then asked him, “Remember that time you also told me about how you were absolutely certain in genetic pre-disposition toward homosexuality? That science will one day discover that gay gene?”

“Yes . . .” he replied.

“Well,” my dad continued. “How would you feel if the medical community came up with a genetic fetal test, and expectant parents can test whether or not their unborn child is pre-disposed to homosexuality, and then women all over the country ask for abortions on those innocent ‘gay’ babies?”

“That’s just wrong,” he replied, horrified.  “There’s nothing wrong with that child.”

My dad just stared at him.

John paused, then said, “You set me up.”

“Yeah, I did.”

“Well, honestly, I don’t know what to say.” John went on to admit that he had no idea how to reconcile his belief in a woman’s right to choose with his disgust at the idea of abortion because of genetic sexual pre-disposition. “Those parents would need to be educated on homosexuality. It’s not something to fear.”

My dad countered, “But you said no mandated education.”

A few weeks go by, and my dad runs into John in an airport terminal. “Hey! How are you?” he asks my dad with a handshake. “You know, I have to tell you something. My partner and I went on a vacation retreat with other liberal and gay couples. We’re all sitting around drinking coffee and I tell them about our conversation. The whole room was silent. None of us have an answer for you. Our beliefs can’t be reconciled.”

Back to the morning where my dad and Jane are preparing for their day. My dad finishes up his story about his conversations with John. She says how angry and horrified she is over the thought of abortions because of sexuality, and then adds her own anger at abortions over mixed-ethnic parentage. “It is offensive,” she practically spits out. She also admits that her belief in a woman’s right to choose, no questions asked, cannot be reconciled with this thought.

“Abortions because of sexuality? Because of a probable color of the babies skin? There’s nothing wrong with that child,” he said.

“It is offensive,” she said.

“What about the sweet babies aborted because of genetic disorders such as down syndrome or trisomy 18? There’s nothing wrong with that child,” he said.

“It is offensive,” she said.

“What about babies aborted because of their gender?There’s nothing wrong with that child,” he said.

“It is offensive,” she said.

“What about babies aborted because of fear of social stigma or family backlash? Because of lack of money or support? What about babies aborted because their mother is scared, and abortion is an abstract solution in a mind that doesn’t want to know how it actually happens?There’s nothing wrong with that child,” he said.

“It is offensive,” she said.

“What about babies aborted because of a woman’s desire to keep her body the way it is, or for no other reason than convenience? There’s nothing wrong with that child,” he said.

“It is offensive,” she said.

There was also nothing wrong with the millions of babies that have been aborted already.

So when do our unborn children get the protection they deserve? When do our expectant mothers get the educational resources they need? When do our pre-teens and teenagers get the sexual education that includes how their young brains work and hormones and reactions (and those of their partners!) so they can make better choices “in the heat of the moment?” So they can choose to avoid “the heat of the moment” all together? So abstinence suddenly makes much more sense to them? Absolutely there are cases of rape, incest, and abuse which do indeed take these choices away from women. I’m not here saying there isn’t.

Readers, why can’t the sympathy and outrage for Cecil the Lion’s murder apply to murdered and dismembered unborn children?

“There’s nothing wrong with that child,” he said.

“It is offensive,” she said.

Just a thought.

A Letter to my Children: Please Choose Marriage

In Abstinence, Child Development, Choice, Cohabitation, Education, Families, father, Marriage, Media, motherhood, Parenting, Sexual Freedom, The Family, Values on August 3, 2015 at 8:01 am

writing a letterby Erin Weist

Someday I hope my children make it a priority to get married. I know it will only get harder to keep the traditions of family-building alive, rampant as societies are with self-serving choices. I wanted to write a letter in hopes of expressing to them why I think marriage is important and why I hope they choose this path when the time comes.

My dear sweet babies,

I know you will only be babies for a little while. I know when this letter becomes really pertinent to your life you will be grown and moving into adulthood. I hope you are happy. You can do this by making choices that lead to overall happiness. Unfortunately the world around you is full of sophistries that try to lie about ways you will be happy. These ways are generally self-serving and focus on immediate pleasures rather than true, long-term happiness. One of the things that I truly hope for your futures is that you make it a priority to find a good spouse and create a family together.

Many voices around the world say that marriage isn’t important, that it is too binding, that people need to be free, that relationships should be fluid. Please don’t listen. Your mother (who loves you more than you will know until you have your own children) begs you to turn away from these ideas. Marrying your father was the best decision I’ve ever made and has brought me some of the single greatest blessings in this life—especially all of you! Many people will also say that you don’t need a spouse to have children, that you can co-habitate with multiple partners of any gender at any given time, even simultaneously. Again, please don’t heed these selfish lures. They may tout happiness and freedom but they are meant only to ensnare and enslave. Women & men were made to be together—mating for life, as it were! When you follow the ends of these purposes you will find happiness!

I love your dad so much and I know he loves me, but these are only words. Real love also comes through actions, not immediate pleasure. It’s the support of one another through difficult choices or trials. It’s encouraging each other to set lofty goals, both individually and as a couple, and seeing it through in attaining those goals. It’s intimacy on a much deeper level than can be found anywhere else. It’s putting the needs of another human ABOVE your own. This will be preparation for becoming a mother or father to your own children.

As an example, while writing this letter I have been interrupted several times by one of you when it is way past bedtime (no, I won’t tell you who) and each time I have been stern and annoyed at the disruption. Finally when it came to tears I realized that I wasn’t practicing what I preached—putting someone else’s needs above my own. So I asked my sweet child, “what do you need?” The reply, “a hug,” was a sweet reminder of the lessons I’ve learned as a mother about selflessness and how those actions truly bring peace and happiness. Now he is in bed and we are both filled.

Family life may not be the only place to learn these important lessons but it is specially created to be the most intensive course in learning and joy that we can ever have. I want the best for all of you, I hope you want the best for yourself and never settle for any counterfeit. I hope your father & I present to you a positive image about the joy & benefits of marriage and that you’ll want that life for yourself. We love each other and we love you. Don’t ever settle for anything less yourself.

Love, mom.

Do Parents Matter?

In Abstinence, Child Development, Cohabitation, Courts, Families, father, Freedom, Government, Marriage, Parenting, Same-Sex Marriage, Sexual Freedom, Single Mothers, Supreme Court, The Family, Values on July 31, 2015 at 11:21 am
parents with adult sonby Mekelle Tenney
Do children need both mom and dad? This has become a very controversial question. Do children do best in a home where both the mom and dad are actively involved in their child’s life? This question has been brought up several times in the debate on same sex marriage. However this concern has been dismissed in most cases based on the lack of evidence to support the claim that children do best with both a mother and father. Due to the fact that same sex marriage is a fairly new concept in America it is safe to say that perhaps that is true. We don’t have enough data on same sex couples to conduct the proper research, at least here in America. However the question of needing a mom and a dad has been asked long before the same sex marriage debate came around. Society has been dealing with the effects of the broken family long before this issue came up.
The state of the family in America.
Currently 40.6% of  babies born in the United States are born to unwed mothers
According to the US Census one in three American children grow up without a father present in the home.
Divorce rate in America is between 40% and 50%.
Over 40% of cohabiting couples have children.
48% of women cohabitate with their spouse or partner before they marry.
What difference does it make?
The following are just a few of many findings surrounding parenting and child development.
Toddlers with involved fathers are better problem solvers and have higher IQs by age three.
Children with involved fathers are 43% more likely to have mostly all A’s in school.
Children with involved fathers are 33% less likely to repeat a grade.
 Girls with involved fathers have higher self-esteem and are less likely to become pregnant as a teenager.
Studies show that by 8 weeks of age infants can notice the difference between a male and female interacting with them.
Fathers encourage competition while mothers encourage equity. Many psychologists believe that it is dangerous to have only one of those parenting styles. In order for a child to develop healthy socially as well as mentally they need both parenting styles.
Psychologists have also found that mothers and fathers communicate differently with their children. They have also found that children need both forms of communication for healthy social development.
Mothers naturally care for and nurture their children while fathers tend to play and interact. Again, both are needed in a child’s development.
What now?
With the legalization of same sex marriage The number of children without mothers or fathers in the home will continue to increase. The social science surrounding the issue of child development and the need for both male and female influence will continue to be ignored. And the children are the ones who will pay the price. What a selfish generation we have become.
Continue to support the family!
Though the statistics shared earlier about the state of the family may seem very discouraging it is important for us to remember that the family still needs advocates. Though we lost the battle on marriage there are still many other battles to fight and our involvement is critical. We must continue to stand for the family, be aware of what goes on in congress and how it affects the institution of the family, be informed, and speak up! The family needs you and your voice.

More than two Parents: Not so New and Not so Enlightened

In Abstinence, adoption, Child Development, Choice, Cohabitation, Courts, Diane Robertson, Families, father, Feminism, Free Speech, Freedom, Government, Marriage, Parental Rights, Sexual Freedom, The Family, Values on July 29, 2015 at 3:10 pm

child 3by Diane Robertson

In 2013 California made it legally possible for children to have more than two parents. More states will surely follow suit. The diversity-in-family-structure-loving-liberals think this is enlightened. They’re working hard to bring society out of the dark ages of Married mother and father families into the “Brave New World” of many parents.

Except this idea isn’t so brave and isn’t so new. Some children have already had a similar experience through divorce and they are speaking outThe Ruth Institute is collecting stories from children of divorce. As it turns out divorced couples, remarried couples, step families, broken families, and shared custody don’t actually feel so enlightened to the children who grew up in these situations.

One such personal story, told by Jennifer Johnson, illustrates what it actually feels like growing up with 5 parents. Johnson’s parents divorced when she was about three. Her mother remarried once and her father remarried twice. Johnson explains what her life was like growing up with five parents:

“it means going back and forth between all those households on a regular basis, never having a single place to call home during your most tender and vulnerable years. It means having divided Christmases, other holidays, and birthdays–you spend one with one parent, and another with the other parent, never spending a single holiday or birthday with both parents. Imagine having each of your parents completely ignore the other half of you, the other half of your family, as if it did not even exist. Meanwhile, imagine each parent pouring their energy into their new families and creating a unified home for their new children. These experiences give you the definite impression of being something leftover, something not quite part of them. You live like that on a daily basis for 18+ years.”

So why would so many adults push for this type of family brokenness and even make it possible for many adults to have legal control over a child? It’s called selfishness. Adults want this so they can have children and have sex with whoever they please and at whatever stage of life they wish. They want this sort of life legal so their partner can make medical and educational decisions for their children. They want convenience for themselves, but not their children.

Johnson writes about a woman, Masha Gessen, a prominent LGBT activist, who grew up with a married mother and father and speaks frankly about how her children have 5 parents. Gessen bemoans the fact that there, as yet, isn’t a way for her children to have all of their parents legally:

“I have three kids who have five parents, more or less, and I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally… I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality, and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.”

Johnson’s replies to Gessen simply calling out the truth of the matter:

“If what I had is so great, then why don’t they want it as children? Here’s my conclusion: they want it as adults but not as children. They want the benefits of the socially conservative family structure when they are children. But as adults, they want sexual freedom, or at least they want to appear ‘open minded’ and ‘tolerant’ about others sexual choices, even at the expense of children, even though they themselves would never want to live under what they advocate. It’s a bizarre sort of a ‘win-win’ for them, I guess.”

Children don’t need more than two legal parents. Society doesn’t need diversity in family structure. All children and all of society needs responsible adults who marry before having children, work daily on a loving relationship and together raise their children in stable, happy homes. It can be done and would be the source of a truly “enlightened” society!

Marriage: The Anti-Poverty Weapon

In Abstinence, Birth Rate, Child Development, Choice, Cohabitation, Families, father, Marriage, motherhood, Sexual Freedom, The Family, Values on July 28, 2015 at 9:07 am

wedding ringsby Carol Soelberg

It was all over the news last week: “U.S. poverty heads toward highest level in 50 years.” Other countries around the world, notably Greece and Spain, continue to struggle with insolvency and surging rates of poverty. Economists and other experts point to all sorts of reasons: unemployment, the global recession, strains on government safety nets, globalization, outsourcing, automation…. But I have yet to read anything this week that points to the greatest contributing factor to poverty – the breakdown of marriage and family.

Forgotten in the conversation is the fact that marriage is the strongest anti-poverty weapon that we have! In fact, several years ago the liberal-leaning Brookings Institution pointed out that “the proliferation of single-parent households accounts for virtually all of the increase in child poverty since the early 1970s.” (1)

In 2003, noting the dramatic difference in poverty rates between married-couple families and single mother families, Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation wondered what would happen if the parents of 3.93 million children living in poverty had married. So using the marriage rates from 1960, he theoretically “married” those parents. The result: instead of 3.93 million children living in poverty, we would have 0.75 million children living in poverty. You can see the details of his analysis here.

Data from the U.S. Census Bureau: A child living with two married parents is more than three times less likely to be living in poverty than a child living with either a single or cohabiting mother, or with both unmarried biological parents. (2)
 

Non-marital childbearing and cohabitation at the center of the problem

Single parent homes are rapidly becoming the norm. As the ranks of the unwed mothers climb (41 percent of all births in the U.S. and over 70 percent in the African-American community), no one seems to dare mention the critical importance of marriage. Even though much is said about the poverty of unwed mothers and their children, there is an extreme reluctance to mention pre-marital sex, non-marital childbearing and cohabitation as a focal point of the problem.

Few want to discuss how, on average, those who live together without the benefit of marriage will see a 58 percent reduction in their lifetime wealth relative to those who are married.(3) [75 percent reduction in wealth for those who never long-term partner or marry at all.] Or, that the poverty rate for children living in cohabiting households is about five times the poverty rate of married couple households [31 percent vs. 6 percent]. (4)

Few are willing to talk about the effects of divorce and its affect on wages and the economic stability of individuals, particularly women and children, nor its impact on family wealth overall.

This much we know and must talk about: 

No other social institution has ever provided or will ever provide the same level of benefits as marriage between a man and a woman. Objective studies have consistently shown that man-woman marriage is, among other things, the optimal and most effective means of (1) bearing children; (2) raising children and providing for their physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual welfare; (3) transforming males into husbands/fathers and females into wives/mothers; (4) bridging the male-female divide; and (5) channeling healthy sexual activity and discouraging unhealthy sexual activity. (5)

It must be stated repeatedly: strong marriages and families are an essential part of strong and healthy economies. 

You and your family are part of the solution

A wise man has said: “No success can compensate for failure in the home.” By the same token, we directly and severely limit our success as individuals and as nations when we neglect the home and don’t see its success as a key to our prosperity!

The loss of human capital that occurs from family breakdown stunts economies in so many ways, but most tragic is the human misery we inflict upon ourselves and upon our children.

Here’s what you can do: 

1. Prepare for marriage or work at making your own marriage successful.
2. Have children and put their growth into happy, productive citizens at the center of your busy lives.
3. Recognize that no marriage or family is perfect, but strive to create and model a healthy and successful family.
4. Get educated and speak up. Family capital is a very real thing. Share the message of not only the social and religious importance of marriage and family, but make people aware of the fiscal impact of strong families.
5. If you are just promoting conservative fiscal public policy and not emphasizing the importance of the social issues, then you are missing an important part of the solution.
6. At every opportunity, advocate for traditional marriage and mother-father families. As always we at United Families International welcome and need your support as we strive to do the same.

Truth or Consequences

In Abortion, Abstinence, Child Development, Choice, Courts, date rape, Education, Families, Feminism, Free Speech, Freedom, Human Rights, motherhood, Same-Sex Marriage, Sanctity of Life, Sexual Freedom, Single Mothers, Supreme Court, Transgender, Values, Women's Rights on July 24, 2015 at 9:19 am

choice and consequence 2by Erin Weist

While a multitude of ills befall our world on a regular basis, recently very few things have aroused such passions on an international scale than the issues surrounding marriage & family. Not far behind, and related by nature, is the controversy of abortion. In wake of the recent headlines regarding abortion in the United States I have thought about why this is such a difficult issue to resolve. I feel incredibly strong about the immorality of abortion–that it flies in the face of my faith, my regard for human life and my regard for human choices. But choice is exactly where the difference lies between the two opinions. Pro-abortion advocates have touted for decades that the thing they hold sacrosanct above all else is the ability for women to be able to choose what happens to their body. But I disagree. In fact, I would argue that theirs is nothing more than a hashtag, a P.R. move, and a tightly controlled dialogue that has nothing to do with choice.

Fast-forward several decades into our sexual revolution and you will find a multitude of choices. Choices to engage in sexual activity at nearly any age (not legal at younger ages but unfortunately still made available through chat sites, phone apps and other technological advances), choices to engage with a multitude of sexual partners, and choices to experiment with various gender identities. None of these have been inhibited through legislation, allowing people the option to choose morality or immorality. We have our freedom, we have our choices. In this way I am pro-choice.

The problem is that we’ve forgotten to teach each generation that consequences come as a result of choices. Where I draw the line is when a woman makes those choices and, instead of recognizing the natural consequences that come of engaging in various sexual activities (or even engaging only once!), multitudes of people from school administrators to healthcare practitioners to politicians proclaim that she can continue to choose what will come as a result of her sexual activity.

Now this seems to be basic biology to me: engaging in intercourse leads to pregnancy. So when pro-choice advocates say they want a woman to choose what she does with her body, what they really mean is that she’s already chosen and they want women to not have consequences. They want to undo what’s already been done and be free from natural biological processes.

What a great disservice this has done to entire generations of people! To think that you can make choices and be free from consequences of those choices flies in the face of every natural process on earth! Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. You absolutely cannot expect to act with no repercussions–we reap what we sow. To abandon this basic principle on which the earth turns is complete folly. So what we end up with is a selfish, uneducated populace that doesn’t recognize that the choice that has been made to engage in intercourse has now produced another being who is blameless but regardless must now be considered as part of the equation.

Once a woman is pregnant her choices are not merely her own consideration now. Granted, in the case where a woman is impregnated against her will, there needs to be greater compassion and public dialogue on how to handle such delicate cases, including considerations of how to care for the mother & child in such undesirable pregnancies, legal or criminal action to be taken against the predators, and more.

Many of these issues are far from simple but one thing is clear. Laws are meant to give freedom to live after the pursuit of happiness for all, including curtailing behavior that inhibits anothers’ freedom. Once someone has made a choice that involves another life form, laws need to be crafted to protect that life form and not simply the woman seeking to live without consequence.

What’s New at your Kid’s School?

In Abstinence, Child Development, Choice, Education, Families, Free Speech, Freedom, Gender, Gender Identity, Government, Homosexuality, Human Rights, Parental Rights, Schools, Sex Education, Sexual Freedom, Sexual Orientation, The Family, Transgender, Values, Violence on July 13, 2015 at 3:45 pm

You're teaching my child what?by Rebecca Mallory

Remember back in the olden days when you were punished for doing something wrong in school? Remember when the really bad guys were suspended for fighting, stealing or cheating? Remember when you could opt out of Sex Ed if you felt uncomfortable? Well, times have changed. Many school policies have loosened standards to the point that your child may not be safe at school. So as you’re enjoying your summer on the beach, in the mountains, or in your own backyard, consider these examples before you send your kids back to school for another year.

I have a friend who’s kids go to a public school in Virginia. Her daughter came home one day and handed her mom a paper from the school informing parents of upcoming sex education content. The gist of it was that “since children before the age of 13 can’t really identify with a particular gender, we encourage all children to explore and experiment”. Really? And who gave you permission to do that? The Fairfax County school district will include “gender identity” into the mandatory curriculum which will include homosexuality and transgenderism. Parents may not opt out of these programs which have been moved from the Family Life Education curriculum to health classes which are mandatory. Convenient, huh? There will be no “girls” or “boys” bathrooms either. Students can use either that they feel they identity with.

In Lafayette, California some high school kids are taught by employees of Planned Parenthood. After taking these courses, students reported to their parents that they felt pressured to have sex. These “instructors” advised and encouraged students to experiment with oral sex, condom use, contraception, intercourse, etc.  Abstinence? No way. Planned Parenthood is allotted more government goodies the more promiscuous kids are. Why would they encourage abstinence when that would put them out of business?

Sex education is not the only questionable content area you should be aware of. Common Core math standards actually allow 5 as the answer to 2+2 as long as the student can “show” their work. Common Core math is so confusing that parents have a difficult time helping their kids do homework. Classical literature is a thing of the past being replaced with books like Nineteen Minutes“Nineteen Minutes” by Jodi Piccoult. Unbeknownst to parents, this book contains graphic language of two teens engaging in rough sex. (The Blaze May 6, 2014).  And now with the recent Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay marriage in every state of the Union, you can bet further explicit content will be forced upon our children to make them conform to this liberal agenda.

Liberal policies have largely snuffed out encouraging students to think for themselves. In the past, standard literary curriculum included classics such as “Moby Dick”, Wuthering Heights”, and “To Kill a Mockingbird”. These pieces teach the reader critical thinking, how to analyze literature which contributes to the human experience. These classical standard works have now been replaced with non-fiction governmental handbooks that supposedly “prepare the student to go to college” but do not allow student to think for themselves. Critics have called it nothing but indoctrination. Unfortunately, these are not the most frightening changes.

Many schools in New York have adopted a new “progressive” discipline program where students caught stealing, cheating, doing drugs or even attacking someone will not be suspended. Now they will be sent to a “talking circle” where they can discuss their feelings.  “Convinced traditional discipline is racist because blacks are suspended at higher rates than whites, New York City’s Department of Education has in all but the most serious and dangerous offenses replaced out-of-school suspensions with a touchy-feely alternative punishment called “restorative justice,” which is not punishment at all- it’s therapy. The only problem…they backfire everywhere they’re used because they make schools less safe. (New York Post,  March 3, 2014) Children should be allowed to have school choice and go where the best teachers are. But liberals fight school choice all around. Why? Because of unions and where the money flows. The poor are the ones who suffer most from these liberal policies.

These are only a snippet of what is happening to our public school system. I strongly encourage you to find out what’s going on in your school. Curriculum and policy seem to change with each new administration. But what happens to those  children who were subjected to those now failed policies? It comes down to taking responsibility for our own kids. No longer can we sit idly by and merely hope for their success or that they will be safe each day. School will start again before you know it America. Take notice!

Marriage is Dead? The Case against “The Case Against Marriage”

In Abstinence, Child Development, Choice, Cohabitation, Divorce, Families, Feminism, Free Speech, Freedom, Government, Health Care, Marriage, Media, Meet UFI, Parenting, Research, Sexual Freedom, Single Mothers, The Family, Values on July 7, 2015 at 1:21 pm

Newly Married Couple ca. 2003

“Marriage is dead,”. . . or, at least,  no longer necessary was the Nietzchean-like declaration of two young, female writers in Newsweek.  In an article entitled “The Case Against Marriage,” Jessica Bennett and Jesse Ellison lay-out with dismissive nonchalance, and not a small amount of arrogance, the various reasons that they, and women like them no longer need marriage. “Once upon a time, marriage made sense,” they write.

“It was how women ensured their financial security, got the father of their children to stick around, and gained access to a host of legal rights. But 40 years after the feminist movement established women’s rights in the workplace, a generation after the divorce rate peaked, and a decade after Sex and the City made singledom chic, marriage is–from a legal and practical standpoint, anyway–no longer necessary.”

Well, from a “legal standpoint,” they may be correct. With the advent of no-fault divorce, and a growing welfare state, singledom is no longer legally disadvantaged, and as they claim, may be advantaged in some ways. However, from every other standpoint–practical or otherwise–they could not be further from the truth. Legal structures and societal trends may obscure this fact, but the truth is traditional marriage benefits everyone–men, women, children, and as a result, society. Marriage is in fact necessary. Why? Simply put: because marriage produces the best results for society and especially for women.

The danger is that the “Marriage is dead” crowd, so aptly represented by Bennett and Ellison, is getting louder, and with changes in public policy increasingly disadvantaging the married, and society increasingly glorifying “chic singledom” this crowd is becoming more persuasive. Fortunately, the facts are on the side of marriage. So please indulge us as we take on Bennett and Ellison, point by point, in our case against “the case against marriage.”

  1. Marriage is no longer necessary for child-rearing or, at least, society no longer expects women to be married to have children. Bennett and Ellison point out that the social stigma against marriage disappeared a long time ago, with 41 percent of births being to unmarried mothers. They also make the claim that this can be an advantage, for in Scandinavia, where unmarried parents are the norm, parents actually spend more time with their children. What Bennett and Ellison seem to forget are outcomes.


Yes, the social stigma against single parents may be gone, but the negative consequences for children are not. Study after study has shown that children living with a married mom and dad are better off. They are more likely to have better health, fewer behavioral and emotional problems, better cognitive and verbal development and greater education and job attainment. All the statistics are clear, traditional marriage is better for children.

As for the parent with child time ratio, if their facts are correct, Scandinavia would be the exception, an exception enabled by a cradle-to-grave welfare state in which the government compensates for the financial and social instability inherent to unmarried child-rearing. The more children are raised out of wedlock, the more government welfare programs are needed to compensate. That is a simple fact. And with government debt rising around the world, this is a responsibility most governments simply cannot afford.

  1. Marriage is no longer necessary to engage in sexual relations. It is true that many, some would argue most, no longer wait until marriage to engage in sexual intercourse. Bennett and Ellison fairly accurately, if a bit glibly, express the general attitude: “And the idea that we’d ‘save ourselves’ for marriage? Please.” Yet, as mainstream as this attitude may be, it is not one they should be touting as a reason to dispose of marriage.

No matter what societal mores may be, pre-marital sex leads to negative outcomes. It leads to more out-of-wedlock childbearing, more STDs, more violence in relationships, more mental and emotional trauma to women, and cohabitation contributes to a higher divorce rate–and that’s just the short list of the “contributions” of pre-martial sex. There is nothing about this trend that is healthy and good for society.

  1. Government programs and legislation no longer benefit the married, and probably advantage the single. Bennett and Ellison rightly point out that under current governmental policy; it sometimes doesn’t pay to be married. Unmarried couples have nearly all the rights of married couples, “federal law favors unmarried taxpayers . . . and under President Obama’s health plan, low-earning single people get better subsidies to buy insurance.”

But the duo forgets to mention that 75 percent of the $150+ billion dollars spent annually on various government welfare programs goes directly to single parents and individuals in non-traditional relationships. On the other hand, marriage is financially advantageous in nearly every other way. Here’s just a few facts:

– Marriage increases wealth over one’s lifetime. Among couples who marry and stay married, their net worth increases on average by 16 percent with each year. Over a lifetime that is, on average, a 93 percent increase in wealth over those who remain single.

– For those in poverty, particularly, marriage is even more important financially. According to one study, seventy percent of never-married mothers would be able to escape poverty if they were married to the father of their children.

No government program can tout such success in alleviating poverty. So government programs may not directly benefit the married, but the married are still better off financially, even without tax breaks.

  1. Women are not happier in marriage. Well, this one is just blatantly false. If you would like to talk superficially about marriage, as Bennett and Ellison do, you can certainly cite enough male shortcomings to discourage any woman from wanting to marry. But the truth of the matter is evidence indicates that both men and women are happier in marriage. Statistics show that married people are happier and wealthier than widowed, divorced, separated, or never-married people across the board. And not only are women happier in marriage, they also experience lower levels of violence, poverty, depression and emotional trauma. Not to mention, they also enjoy better sex lives and live longer than single women. So the amount of housework they do weekly may increase due to the simple fact of being married to a man, but the positives definitely outweigh the negatives.
  2. Humans are not made to stay together for a lifetime, as illustrated by soaring divorce rates. “With our life expectancy in the high 70s,” write Bennett and Ellison, “the idea that we’re meant to be together forever is less realistic. . . . Healthy partnerships are possible, for sure–but the permanence of marriage seems naive, almost arrogant.” Let us suggest that what is “arrogant,” is assuming humans are not equipped for lifetime commitment (against centuries’ worth of evidence to the contrary) on the evidence that we are living a little longer and divorcing more often.

The truth is extended longevity accounts for only a tiny fraction of the increase in divorce from 1965 to 1980. And more importantly, over 70 percent of all people who have ever been married are STILL married to the same person. The other 30 percent are part of a marry-divorce, remarry-divorce, remarry-divorce pattern that drives the overall divorce rate to around 50 percent.

So perhaps a more accurate diagnosis of the problem is not human nature, but the unrealistic expectations on the part of a minority who continue to marry and remarry. Bennett and Ellison, themselves, identify that expectations of marriage have changed. “Young people today don’t want their parents’ marriage, says Tara Parker-Pope, the author of For Better–they want all-encompassing, head-over-heels fulfillment: a best friend, a business partner, somebody to share sex, love, and chores. In other words, a “soul mate”–which is what 94 percent of singles in their 20s describe what they look for in a partner.” Such expectation would doom any relationship to failure because they are based on selfish gratification which is a number one contributor to divorce. Seventy percent of the population has learned that real fulfillment comes through years of sacrifice and service as soul mates are created–not found!

Conclusion

Jessica Bennett and Jesse Ellison in “The Case Against Marriage,” aren’t the first to set out to disprove the benefits of marriage. In fact, such attempts are almost as old as marriage itself. A very inclusive study of this nature was attempted by a well known anthropologist of the early 1900’s named Joseph Daniel Unwin. He too set out to prove that marriage was irrelevant and even harmful. In his research he chronicled the historical decline of 86 different cultures and was forced to conclude that only marriage with fidelity could lead to cultural prosperity. In fact, he said, “Once a society departs from a social norm of absolute marital monogamy, social chaos ensues within three generations!”

United Families International acknowledges Unwin’s findings and we dedicate large amounts of time and efforts in protecting the institution of traditional marriage as the most basic unit of society around the world. Join us in this effort!

To see a list of studies documenting the importance of marriage as discussed above, go here. Or visit UFI’s website to see UFI’s Guides to Family Issues: The Marriage Advantage and our guide discussing the impact of Cohabitation.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 156 other followers